Objections to the Testimonium Flavianum from Valliant and Fahy’s Creating Christ

[Ken Olson]

I’m crowdsourcing here.

In their book Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Created Christianity, James Valliant and Warren Fahy present three objections to the authenticity of the Testimonium Flavianum which they contend their thesis, that Josephus abetted the Flavian emperors in creating Gentile Christianity, is able to answer.

Here are the relevant pages in the book with the purported objections highlighted in yellow:

Valliant & Fahy - Creating Christ 293 Highlighted.png (208.17 KiB) Viewed 916 times

Valliant & Fahy - Creating Christ 294 Highlighted.png (200.84 KiB) Viewed 916 times

James S. Valliant and C. Warren Fahy, Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Created Christianity (Digital Edition; Crossroad Press, 2016) pp. 293-294.

I am wondering who made these objections and when. Valliant and Fahy don’t cite them. I have a pretty good knowledge of the history of scholarship on the Testimonium Flavianum, but I can’t recall seeing these particular objections in the work of any published scholar. However, I can’t claim to have a comprehensive knowledge of the entirety of opinion on the Testimonium, so perhaps I missed something. Valliant and Fahy do not explicitly claim that they are referring to objections made by scholars, so it’s possible they are to be found in popular works or internet discussions. Nonetheless, they do claim two of these objections are common (and I’m not quite clear on the distinction they are drawing between the second and third objections).

So my question is: Has anyone seen these objections before, and if so, could you cite and quote them?

The first objection seems to presuppose a very particular interpretation of Jewish War 6.5.4:

312 But what more than anything else incited them to go to war was an ambiguous oracle also found in their holy scriptures, which revealed that at that time someone from their country would become ruler of the world. 313 They took this to mean someone of their own race, and many of their scholars followed this wrong path of interpretation. In fact the oracle was pointing to the principate of Vespasian, who was in Judaea when he was proclaimed emperor.

Josephus Jewish War 6.5.4 / 312-313, translated by Martin Hammond (Oxford World’s Classics, 2017)

William Whiston’s 1737 English translation may be found here:
https://penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/war-6.html

Josephus does not call Vespasian the Christ here or anywhere else. The word only occurs in the two mentions of Jesus in Antiquities 18.63-64 and 20.200. Granted, the oracle found in the Jewish scriptures may have been a messianic prophecy, and even more likely may have been interpreted that way by the Jewish rebels, but Josephus does not cite any particular text and certainly does not commit himself to the belief that Vespasian was the Jewish Messiah foretold in prophecy. He says only that it was foretold that Vespasian would become emperor.

My working hypothesis is that Valliant and Fahy’s three objections to the Testimonium are straw men they created to help advance their thesis.

Best,

Ken

PS The passage highlighted in green is cited to Barbara Levick, Vespasian (Routledge, 1999) 67-68 and the literature cited there. I don’t have a copy of Levick’s book on hand, but if anyone has access to it and can tell me what she says there, or, better yet, post a pic of those pages, I would be grateful. If not, I’ll look for a copy of her book on my next trip to the library.

[perseusomega9]

pg 67

Ves67.png (374.37 KiB) Viewed 895 times

pg68

Ves68.png (370.23 KiB) Viewed 895 times

[perseusomega9]

vesnotes1.png (99.93 KiB) Viewed 892 times

vesnotes2.png (353.76 KiB) Viewed 892 times

[Ken Olson]

Thanks for the pages from Barbara Levick's Vespasian persusmega9, and especially for including the notes! It's exactly what I wanted. I'm assuming Rajak is Tessa Rajak, Josephus: The Historian and His Society, which I have on hand.

I will be at least a bit surprised if Rajak says that 'Josephus proclaimed Jesus the Messiah', but I'll check.

Best,

Ken

[Secret Alias]

delete

[Ken Olson]

This is a bit tortuous, but here goes:

Valliant and Fahy write:

Some scholars argue that Josephus proclaimed Vespasian the Messiah in
order to justify his betrayal of the Jewish cause—and to justify the treachery
of many other Jews who had assisted Rome in the war.5 This is certainly
true, but it does not preclude Jewish messianic claims actually being part of
the new imperial cult that Josephus would probably have been enlisted to
help develop for the Flavians after the war. (Creating Christ, 293)

They cite as their authority Barbara Levick, Vespasian, 67-68, and the literature cited there. But they have misconstrued what Levick meant when she wrote:

T. Rajak notes that the prophecy is used more to exculpate Josephus than to extoll the Roman Messiah [Vespasian 67-68].

Vallaint and Fahy seem to have understood this to mean that T. Rajak thinks that Josephus had two motives, to exculpate Josephus and to extoll Vespasian as Messiah, and that he emphasized the former over the latter. Levick's choice of words is unfortunate, but Rajak clearly says that Josephus was not proclaiming Vespasian as the Messiah at all, though some earlier scholars took him that way:

Rajak, Josephus, 192..png (253.86 KiB) Viewed 863 times

To be fair, the fact that Rajak feels the need to correct these scholars (she cites W. Weber and A. Schalit, and Levick cites W. Weber) means that some scholars have taken Josephus to have been calling Vespasian the Messiah. But this is not what Rajak is saying, nor, I think, what Levick meant when she cited Rajak approvingly. Ideally, Valliant and Fahy should have cited scholars who, in fact, agree with them and noted that others disagree.

Best,

Ken

[Secret Alias]

ואספאסיאנוס
VESPASIANUS
Midrash Lekach Tov, Deuteronomy 30:2:1 (11th century), Dionysus Bar-Salibi (12th century) as almost no words begin with vav in Hebrew or Aramaic the name became transmitted as אספאסיאנוס or אספאסייאנוס

6 (V) + 1 (E) + 60 (S) + 90 (P) + 1 (A) + 60 (S) + 10 (I) + 1 (A) + 50 (N) + 6 (U) + 60 (S) = 335

Samaritan Pentateuch שלה = 300 + 30 + 5 (Gen 49:10)

The idea that Vespasian or some Jew somewhere didn't figure this out is hilarious. But scholarship loves to engage in verbal orgies.

Josephus applied this verse to Vespasian when he predicted that the Roman general would be proclaimed emperor in Judea, although, as he himself pointed out, the Jews interpreted “an ambiguous oracle . . . found in their sacred scriptures to the effect that . . . one from their country would become ruler of the world” [Bell. VI, 5, 4 (312f ); ibid. III, 8, 9 (400ff.)]. is is confirmed by Tacitus (Hist. I, 10; V, 13), Suetonius (Ve s p. 4–5) and Dio Cassius (Epitome LXVI: 1)—proof that the Shilo prophecy as interpreted by Josephus was included among the omina imperii of the Flavian dynasty [e Aramaic Bible: e Targums (ed. Martin McNamara et al.; Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1987–), 6:163 n. 25; also in Moses Aberbach and Bernard Grossfeld, Targum Onqelos on Genesis 49: Translation and Analytical Commentary (Aramaic Studies 1; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1976), 14 n. 24; and in eidem, Targum Onkelos to Genesis: A Critical Analysis together with an English Translation of the Text (Denver: Center for Judaic Studies, University of Denver, 1982), 286 n. 22.]

Sure. There's no way that Josephus connected שלה with ואספאסיאנוס. But there are 335 good reasons Vespasian would have bought into this if they did. The immediate context shows that Josephus used gematira or as Ferrar calls it "architectonic gematria" https://books.google.com/books?id=xuxKA ... 22&f=false

Now, if anyone consider these things, he will find that God takes care of mankind, and by all ways possible foreshows to our race what is for their preservation; but that men perish by those miseries which they madly and voluntarily bring upon themselves; 311for the Jews, by demolishing the tower of Antonia, had made their temple foursquare, while at the same time they had it written in their sacred oracles, “That then should their city be taken, as well as their holy house, when once their temple should become foursquare.” 312But now, what did most elevate them in undertaking this war, was an ambiguous oracle that was also found in their sacred writings, how, “about that time, one from their country should become governor of the habitable earth.” 313The Jews took this prediction to belong to themselves in particular, and many of the wise men were thereby deceived in their determination. Now, this oracle certainly denoted the government of Vespasian, who was appointed emperor in Judea. 314However, it is not possible for men to avoid fate, although they see it beforehand. 315But these men interpreted some of these signals according to their own pleasure, and some of them they utterly despised, until their madness was demonstrated, both by the taking of their city and their own destruction.

It is difficult to see what connection Vespasian would have to שלה if it were not the numerological connection aforementioned. As שלה is an ambiguous word having no meaning whatsoever Josephus clearly interpreted as a number, שלה would be the natural way of writing 335 in Hebrew so:

לא יסור שבט מיהודה ומחקק מבין רגליו עד כי יבא שלה שילו ולו יקהת עמים

was read:

The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until 335 comes and unto him shall the obedience of the peoples be.

where "until 335 comes" necessarily meant for Josephus "until Vespasian comes" ...

[Secret Alias]

I also wonder whether "ambiguous" is the right translation of ἀμφίβολος

Josephus, Wars 6.5.4 §312-313: 312 τὸ δ᾽ ἐπᾶραν αὐτοὺς μάλιστα πρὸς τὸν πόλεμον ἦν χρησμὸς ἀμφίβολος ὁμοίως ἐν τοῖς ἱεροῖς εὑρημένος γράμμασιν, ὡς κατὰ τὸν καιρὸν ἐκεῖνον ἀπὸ τῆς χώρας αὐτῶν τις ἄρξει τῆς οἰκουμένης. 313 τοῦθ᾽ οἱ μὲν ὡς οἰκεῖον ἐξέλαβον καὶ πολλοὶ τῶν σοφῶν ἐπλανήθησαν περὶ τὴν κρίσιν, ἐδήλου δ᾽ ἄρα τὴν Οὐεσπασιανοῦ τὸ λόγιον ἡγεμονίαν ἀποδειχθέντος ἐπὶ Ἰουδαίας αὐτοκράτορος. / 312

But what lifted them up especially toward the war was a thrown about oracle likewise found in their sacred writings, as at that season someone from their country should rule the inhabited earth. 313 This they took as belonging to their own house, and many of the wise men were misled in their judgment. But this oracle pointed to the leadership of Vespasian, who was appointed autocrat in Judea.

The sense is rather that this was an oracle which was 'thrown about' to various personages but it properly fit Vespasian's rule(rship). I think this confirms that Josephus 'solved' the riddle of Genesis 49:10 which others couldn't do.

All known Jewish and Samaritan interpretations develop from gematria. יבא שילה = 'until the messiah comes' = 358, Shiloh = 345 = Moses etc. Recognizing Vespasian as the 335 who comes would have been a contemporary one which has been ignored by modern scholarship.

Also the 335 echoes the 1335 of Daniel 12:12

[MrMacSon]

fwiw

Tacitus' Histories 1.10

Flavius Vespasian, a general of Nero's appointment, was carrying on the war in Judaea with three legions, and he had no wish or feeling adverse to Galba. He had in fact sent his son Titus to acknowledge his authority and bespeak his favour, as in its proper place I shall relate. As for the hidden decrees of fate, the omens and the oracles that marked out Vespasian and his sons for imperial power, we believed in them only after his success.

Tacitus' Histories 5.13

Prodigies had occurred, which this nation, prone to superstition, but hating all religious rites, did not deem it lawful to expiate by offering and sacrifice. There had been seen hosts joining battle in the skies, the fiery gleam of arms, the temple illuminated by a sudden radiance from the clouds. The doors of the inner shrine were suddenly thrown open, and a voice of more than mortal tone was heard to cry that the Gods were departing. At the same instant there was a mighty stir as of departure. Some few put a fearful meaning on these events, but in most there was a firm persuasion that, in the ancient records of their priests, was contained a prediction of how at this very time the East was to grow powerful and rulers, coming from Judæa, were to acquire universal empire. These mysterious prophecies had pointed to Vespasian and Titus, but the common people, with the usual blindness of ambition, had interpreted these mighty destinies of themselves, and could not be brought even by disasters to believe the truth.

Seutonius' Vespasian 5

He dreamed in Greece that the beginning of good fortune for himself and his family would come as soon as Nero had a tooth extracted; and on the next day it came to pass that a physician walked into the hall and showed him a tooth which he had just then taken out.

When he consulted the oracle of the god of Carmel in Judaea, the lots were highly encouraging, promising that whatever he planned or wished however great it might be, would come to pass; and one of his high-born prisoners, Josephus by name, as he was being put in chains, declared most confidently that he would soon be released by the same man, who would then, however, be emperor.

Omens were also reported from Rome: Nero in his latter days was admonished in a dream to take the sacred chariot of Jupiter Optimus Maximus from its shrine to the house of Vespasian and from there to the Circus. Not long after this, too, when Galba was on his way to the elections which gave him his second consulship, a statue of the Deified Julius of its own accord turned towards the East; and on the field of Betriacum, before the battle began, two eagles fought in the sight of all, and when one was vanquished, a third came from the direction of the rising sun and drove off the victor.

Seutonius Vespasian 7

beginning a civil war and sending ahead generals with troops to Italy, he crossed meanwhile to Alexandria, to take possession of the key to Egypt. There he dismissed all his attendants and entered the temple of Serapis alone, to consult the auspices as to the duration of his power. And when after many propitiatory offerings to the god he at length turned about, it seemed to him that his freedman Basilides offered him sacred boughs, garlands, and loaves, as is the custom there; and yet he knew well that no one had let him in, and that for some time he had been hardly able to walk by reason of rheumatism, and was besides far away. And immediately letters came with the news that Vitellius had been routed at Cremona and the emperor himself slain at Rome.

Vespasian as yet lacked prestige and a certain divinity, so to speak, since he was an unexpected and still new-made emperor; but these also were given him. A man of the people who was blind, and another who was lame, came to him together as he sat on the tribunal, begging for the help for their disorders which Serapis had promised in a dream; for the god declared that Vespasian would restore the eyes, if he would spit upon them, and give strength to the leg, if he would deign to touch it with his heel. Though he had hardly any faith that this could possibly succeed, and therefore shrank even from making the attempt, he was at last prevailed upon by his friends and tried both things in public before a large crowd; and with success. At this same time, by the direction of certain soothsayers, some vases of antique workmanship were dug up in a consecrated spot at Tegea in Arcadia and on them was an image very like Vespasian.

[Chrissy Hansen]

I’m crowdsourcing here.

In their book Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Created Christianity, James Valliant and Warren Fahy present three objections to the authenticity of the Testimonium Flavianum which they contend their thesis, that Josephus abetted the Flavian emperors in creating Gentile Christianity, is able to answer.

Here are the relevant pages in the book with the purported objections highlighted in yellow:

Valliant & Fahy - Creating Christ 293 Highlighted.png

Valliant & Fahy - Creating Christ 294 Highlighted.png

James S. Valliant and C. Warren Fahy, Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Created Christianity (Digital Edition; Crossroad Press, 2016) pp. 293-294.

I am wondering who made these objections and when. Valliant and Fahy don’t cite them. I have a pretty good knowledge of the history of scholarship on the Testimonium Flavianum, but I can’t recall seeing these particular objections in the work of any published scholar. However, I can’t claim to have a comprehensive knowledge of the entirety of opinion on the Testimonium, so perhaps I missed something. Valliant and Fahy do not explicitly claim that they are referring to objections made by scholars, so it’s possible they are to be found in popular works or internet discussions. Nonetheless, they do claim two of these objections are common (and I’m not quite clear on the distinction they are drawing between the second and third objections).

So my question is: Has anyone seen these objections before, and if so, could you cite and quote them?

The first objection seems to presuppose a very particular interpretation of Jewish War 6.5.4:

312 But what more than anything else incited them to go to war was an ambiguous oracle also found in their holy scriptures, which revealed that at that time someone from their country would become ruler of the world. 313 They took this to mean someone of their own race, and many of their scholars followed this wrong path of interpretation. In fact the oracle was pointing to the principate of Vespasian, who was in Judaea when he was proclaimed emperor.

Josephus Jewish War 6.5.4 / 312-313, translated by Martin Hammond (Oxford World’s Classics, 2017)

William Whiston’s 1737 English translation may be found here:
https://penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/war-6.html

Josephus does not call Vespasian the Christ here or anywhere else. The word only occurs in the two mentions of Jesus in Antiquities 18.63-64 and 20.200. Granted, the oracle found in the Jewish scriptures may have been a messianic prophecy, and even more likely may have been interpreted that way by the Jewish rebels, but Josephus does not cite any particular text and certainly does not commit himself to the belief that Vespasian was the Jewish Messiah foretold in prophecy. He says only that it was foretold that Vespasian would become emperor.

My working hypothesis is that Valliant and Fahy’s three objections to the Testimonium are straw men they created to help advance their thesis.

Best,

Ken

PS The passage highlighted in green is cited to Barbara Levick, Vespasian (Routledge, 1999) 67-68 and the literature cited there. I don’t have a copy of Levick’s book on hand, but if anyone has access to it and can tell me what she says there, or, better yet, post a pic of those pages, I would be grateful. If not, I’ll look for a copy of her book on my next trip to the library.

With the first objection (Josephus calls Vespasian the Messiah, therefore he could not call Jesus one), I believe that Yan Changyou raised this in Yan Changyou, “Yesu – chuanshuo zhong de xugou renwu,” Shijie zongjiao yanjiu 2 (1983): 122–128. However, I have strong doubts that Valliant and Fahy are familiar with Chinese sources on Josephus, mythicism, or NT scholarship in general. Of course, the whole "good Christian" bit is weird and I've never heard this one uttered before in my reading on the subject. Usually they frame it as, "A Pharisaic Jewish man like Josephus would not have called Jesus 'the Christ' or similar".